More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[westwall]

Did the professor also tell the class that their careers would consist of applying, not denying, science, to the betterment of mankind?

Engineers, sir or madam, are scientists, and their field is logical science. It entails more math accuracy than there are angels on a pin's head. Professional engineers are pledged to accuracy and honesty. Sometimes management doesn't like their honesty and do all they can to get rid of them so they can build sloppy cheap buildings that wind up killing thousands of people unlucky enough to be in it when it collapses, because doing things right means thorough testing of all the theories is in order before human risk factors go in. You don't give a job to the best looking guy or girl engineer, you give the job to the guy who makes the highest score and can prove it quickly and efficiently without batting an eye.

The warmers turned changers who denied science by making a mockery of themselves and those who covered for them were a disgrace to the scientific community. And for reasons not known to those of us who know what is required of ethical scientists, the leftists of the nation took up Al Gore's error-filled script and made it the holy atheists' gospel according to liberals, and they continually populate the headless horse quarter with every gallop into their own fuzzy math world of make-believe and butt-covering. That's pretty darn hard when you've no head.

I am a professional engineer. I've dedicated my life to the application of science to the betterment of mankind, and I continue to.

Climate science is defined by the IPCC. They have revealed to us what needs to be done.

I wish that I had a greater role in the application of IPCC science to the betterment of mankind but age has limited me to the politics only.

I'll take what I can get.

Our energy supply system is out of date. It is clearly not sustainable and needs to be. It is clearly not benign to future life and needs to be. It clearly is not efficient and needs to be.

We will fix all of that, in fact we are.

We all have to choose to be part of the problem or solution.

Engineers have a professional commitment to be part of the solution.

You are free to decide, I am not. Your husband is not. .

Decide your politics. I am pledged to science.

Climate science is "defined" by the IPCC? Seriously? Wow, and you accuse US of being political!

What an ass, just a complete ass you are...

 

[Abraham3]

And for reasons not known to those of us who know what is required of ethical scientists, the leftists of the nation took up Al Gore's error-filled script and made it the holy atheists' gospel according to liberals, and they continually populate the headless horse quarter with every gallop into their own fuzzy math world of make-believe and butt-covering.

1) What errors filled Al Gore's script?

2) Show us the fuzzy math - particularly the math you must believe is fuzzier than that being applied by AGW deniers (when they condescend to actually putting numbers to paper).

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field. A superior sense of ethics would inform you to take their advice. The conclusion you seem to have made - that the world's climate scientists are either incompetent, greedy or both and are involved in an enormous and enormously well coordinated conspiracy - is completely unsupported by the facts and fails numerous examinations of its logical underpinnings.

AGW is real. The grand conspiracy of fuzzy-headed scientists required for you to reject this point, is not.

 

[skookerasbil]

CBS News reporter making CLEAR implication that the oceans could reach 212 degrees!!!!


As they say.......seeing is believing >>>


Oyster is a canary in a coal mine as oceans warm - CBS News


Curious observers in this forum must recognize a dynamic that has been going on in this forum since this USMESSAGEBOARD opened a few years ago: the AGW climate crusaders lie.......all the time they lie because they must.


These people will say anything to ensure the established narrative of global warming NEVER changes no matter what new science comes to light, the most significant of which is the ABSOLUTE FACT that the climate models are WRONG and have ZERO value in predicting the future. They lie about this every single day on this forum!!!


The only reason I hang around this forum is to make sure the curious are aware of the hoax these people perpetuate time and time again!!! They will say anything and throw any number of bombs to freak people out about climate change........and it is all bogus.


"Computer models"........are a fraud. >>>>

The models are wrong | Behind The Black

 

[skookerasbil]

Propaganda and Mind Control >>>

Propaganda mind control: turning truth backwards « Jon Rappoport's Blog


If more people were aware of this dynamic, there would be zero talk of climate change CERTAINLY in terms of making climate predictions!! They are TOTAL nonsense.

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And for reasons not known to those of us who know what is required of ethical scientists, the leftists of the nation took up Al Gore's error-filled script and made it the holy atheists' gospel according to liberals, and they continually populate the headless horse quarter with every gallop into their own fuzzy math world of make-believe and butt-covering.

1) What errors filled Al Gore's script?

2) Show us the fuzzy math - particularly the math you must believe is fuzzier than that being applied by AGW deniers (when they condescend to actually putting numbers to paper).

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field. A superior sense of ethics would inform you to take their advice. The conclusion you seem to have made - that the world's climate scientists are either incompetent, greedy or both and are involved in an enormous and enormously well coordinated conspiracy - is completely unsupported by the facts and fails numerous examinations of its logical underpinnings.

AGW is real. The grand conspiracy of fuzzy-headed scientists required for you to reject this point, is not.

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field.

When those experts are caught, repeatedly, acting unethically, it becomes easier to ignore their warnings.

 

[PMZ]

Engineers, sir or madam, are scientists, and their field is logical science. It entails more math accuracy than there are angels on a pin's head. Professional engineers are pledged to accuracy and honesty. Sometimes management doesn't like their honesty and do all they can to get rid of them so they can build sloppy cheap buildings that wind up killing thousands of people unlucky enough to be in it when it collapses, because doing things right means thorough testing of all the theories is in order before human risk factors go in. You don't give a job to the best looking guy or girl engineer, you give the job to the guy who makes the highest score and can prove it quickly and efficiently without batting an eye.

The warmers turned changers who denied science by making a mockery of themselves and those who covered for them were a disgrace to the scientific community. And for reasons not known to those of us who know what is required of ethical scientists, the leftists of the nation took up Al Gore's error-filled script and made it the holy atheists' gospel according to liberals, and they continually populate the headless horse quarter with every gallop into their own fuzzy math world of make-believe and butt-covering. That's pretty darn hard when you've no head.

I am a professional engineer. I've dedicated my life to the application of science to the betterment of mankind, and I continue to.

Climate science is defined by the IPCC. They have revealed to us what needs to be done.

I wish that I had a greater role in the application of IPCC science to the betterment of mankind but age has limited me to the politics only.

I'll take what I can get.

Our energy supply system is out of date. It is clearly not sustainable and needs to be. It is clearly not benign to future life and needs to be. It clearly is not efficient and needs to be.

We will fix all of that, in fact we are.

We all have to choose to be part of the problem or solution.

Engineers have a professional commitment to be part of the solution.

You are free to decide, I am not. Your husband is not. .

Decide your politics. I am pledged to science.

Climate science is "defined" by the IPCC? Seriously? Wow, and you accuse US of being political!

What an ass, just a complete ass you are...

Why don't you tell us about the climate science that's been developed in the last 25 years outside of the auspices of the IPCC?

Be specific.

 

[PMZ]

And for reasons not known to those of us who know what is required of ethical scientists, the leftists of the nation took up Al Gore's error-filled script and made it the holy atheists' gospel according to liberals, and they continually populate the headless horse quarter with every gallop into their own fuzzy math world of make-believe and butt-covering.

1) What errors filled Al Gore's script?

2) Show us the fuzzy math - particularly the math you must believe is fuzzier than that being applied by AGW deniers (when they condescend to actually putting numbers to paper).

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field. A superior sense of ethics would inform you to take their advice. The conclusion you seem to have made - that the world's climate scientists are either incompetent, greedy or both and are involved in an enormous and enormously well coordinated conspiracy - is completely unsupported by the facts and fails numerous examinations of its logical underpinnings.

AGW is real. The grand conspiracy of fuzzy-headed scientists required for you to reject this point, is not.

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field.

When those experts are caught, repeatedly, acting unethically, it becomes easier to ignore their warnings.

Conspiracy theorists always point to their conspiracy theories as evidence of their conspiracy theories.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

1) What errors filled Al Gore's script?

2) Show us the fuzzy math - particularly the math you must believe is fuzzier than that being applied by AGW deniers (when they condescend to actually putting numbers to paper).

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field. A superior sense of ethics would inform you to take their advice. The conclusion you seem to have made - that the world's climate scientists are either incompetent, greedy or both and are involved in an enormous and enormously well coordinated conspiracy - is completely unsupported by the facts and fails numerous examinations of its logical underpinnings.

AGW is real. The grand conspiracy of fuzzy-headed scientists required for you to reject this point, is not.

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field.

When those experts are caught, repeatedly, acting unethically, it becomes easier to ignore their warnings.

Conspiracy theorists always point to their conspiracy theories as evidence of their conspiracy theories.

Keeping skeptics from publishing, hiding the decline, Mike's nature trick.
Yeah, those are the guys to tell us to spend trillions to drop temps in 2080 by 0.1 degrees.

 

[bripat9643]

1) What errors filled Al Gore's script?

2) Show us the fuzzy math - particularly the math you must believe is fuzzier than that being applied by AGW deniers (when they condescend to actually putting numbers to paper).

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field. A superior sense of ethics would inform you to take their advice. The conclusion you seem to have made - that the world's climate scientists are either incompetent, greedy or both and are involved in an enormous and enormously well coordinated conspiracy - is completely unsupported by the facts and fails numerous examinations of its logical underpinnings.

AGW is real. The grand conspiracy of fuzzy-headed scientists required for you to reject this point, is not.

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field.

When those experts are caught, repeatedly, acting unethically, it becomes easier to ignore their warnings.

Conspiracy theorists always point to their conspiracy theories as evidence of their conspiracy theories.

How else would you prove a conspiracy? The fact is, the major perpetrators of the AGW hoax were nailed when the Climategate emails were published. These so-called "scientists" conspired together to keep the papers of skeptics from getting published, and they admitted to using deceptive practices with their publications. The source code included also proved that they were manipulating the data.

What more proof do you want?

 

[bripat9643]

Climate science is "defined" by the IPCC? Seriously? Wow, and you accuse US of being political!

What an ass, just a complete ass you are...

Why don't you tell us about the climate science that's been developed in the last 25 years outside of the auspices of the IPCC?

Be specific.

No one is trying to perpetrate a hoax outside the IPCC.

 

[PMZ]

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field.

When those experts are caught, repeatedly, acting unethically, it becomes easier to ignore their warnings.

Conspiracy theorists always point to their conspiracy theories as evidence of their conspiracy theories.

Keeping skeptics from publishing, hiding the decline, Mike's nature trick.
Yeah, those are the guys to tell us to spend trillions to drop temps in 2080 by 0.1 degrees.

As we've come to expect, your understanding and reality are poles apart. A consequence of learning avoided.

The IPCC is a scientific body charged with defining the consequences of humanity dumping megatons of FF waste into life's single atmosphere, as an advisory to governments.

That they've done to a point.

Their advice? The consequences? AGW. The more carbon released from where it's been sequestered underground, the warmer our climate will become.

Concluded with certainty.

The exact mechanism and time lag between reaching a given concentration and a resulting stable new climate? Unknown.

The long range weather forecast detailing the specific weather changes resulting from a specific new levels of AGW. Unknown.

Still lots to study and learn.

On another note, we've always known that our FF energy solution was a temporary one. It's both necessary and timely to start changing over to a permanent solution. That's underway now.

The connection between certain AGW and energy modernization?

Maybe none. But, another possibility is that the speed at which we modernize could be critical to future economies.

That’s what is being studied by the IPCC now.

Amateurs like you and I have to wait for the expert scientists, engineers, investors, politicians, builders, business visionaries, etc to study, learn, negotiate, plan, and execute the details.

In the meantime we can decide to support the problem (do nothing) or support the solutions (progress), but neither choice by us will have any effect on the outcome.

The club has struck the ball, the ball is now reacting to all of the forces it will encounter in its flight and landing, and as that unfolds, we'll see the results.

 

[PMZ]

Climate science is "defined" by the IPCC? Seriously? Wow, and you accuse US of being political!

What an ass, just a complete ass you are...

Why don't you tell us about the climate science that's been developed in the last 25 years outside of the auspices of the IPCC?

Be specific.

No one is trying to perpetrate a hoax outside the IPCC.

You never offer any evidence.

 

[PMZ]

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field.

When those experts are caught, repeatedly, acting unethically, it becomes easier to ignore their warnings.

Conspiracy theorists always point to their conspiracy theories as evidence of their conspiracy theories.

How else would you prove a conspiracy? The fact is, the major perpetrators of the AGW hoax were nailed when the Climategate emails were published. These so-called "scientists" conspired together to keep the papers of skeptics from getting published, and they admitted to using deceptive practices with their publications. The source code included also proved that they were manipulating the data.

What more proof do you want?

Every anomaly published by the thieves who stole the emails could be explained in a conspiratorial way, or a benign way.

The conspiracy theorists used their theories to ''prove'' the conspiracy that they expected to find.

The rest of the world yawned.

One of mankind's oldest stories.

 

[PMZ]

You cannot claim ownership of a superior set of ethics when you choose to ignore the warnings of the vast majority of the experts in the field.

When those experts are caught, repeatedly, acting unethically, it becomes easier to ignore their warnings.

Conspiracy theorists always point to their conspiracy theories as evidence of their conspiracy theories.

How else would you prove a conspiracy? The fact is, the major perpetrators of the AGW hoax were nailed when the Climategate emails were published. These so-called "scientists" conspired together to keep the papers of skeptics from getting published, and they admitted to using deceptive practices with their publications. The source code included also proved that they were manipulating the data.

What more proof do you want?

'' How else would you prove a conspiracy?''

Our standards for guilt and innocence are well known.

 

[mamooth]

100s of links to the cbs report. And contrary to your lying assertions, skooks link not only had the relevent quotes,

Which proved he was lying about a supposed "prediction" of 212F warming.

If you disagree, please post the quote where 212F warming was predicted.

but they had the graphic clearly stating "POTENTIAL TEMPERATURE RISE OF 212 DEGREES"

Which was not a prediction. You are either lying or retarded to claim it was.

I REFUSE TO B INTIMIDATED. You now have 12 hours to back up your accusation. Dont ask what I might do if u dont.

Cry at me even harder? Yeah, that's a threat.

 

[flacaltenn]

Full tilt denial and religious apocalyptic pronouncements --- like that CBS report.. That's whats left for the true believers...

NOTHING in that CBS report was real or correct.. Not the oysters, not the 212 degree GRAPHIC THAT THEY DISPLAYED...

And THAT is what public perception is supposed to be based on.. We're not stupid -- Even the stupid are not that stupid..
Guess that leaves you and the other holy rollers..

 

[flacaltenn]

100s of links to the cbs report. And contrary to your lying assertions, skooks link not only had the relevent quotes,

Which proved he was lying about a supposed "prediction" of 212F warming.

If you disagree, please post the quote where 212F warming was predicted.

but they had the graphic clearly stating "POTENTIAL TEMPERATURE RISE OF 212 DEGREES"

Which was not a prediction. You are either lying or retarded to claim it was.

I REFUSE TO B INTIMIDATED. You now have 12 hours to back up your accusation. Dont ask what I might do if u dont.

Cry at me even harder? Yeah, that's a threat.

The whole story is crap.. The guy is not losing oysters due to Ocean Acidification today OR tomorrow.. NOAA says so.. CBS hasn't got the message or they ignored it like you ignore the facts in front of you... There is a graphic shown that says "POTENTIAL TEMPERATURE RISE 212 degrees"... That's a MEANINGLESS PROPAGANDA PLOY.. And it is INTENDED TO DECIEVE AND PANIC the public..

Go ahead --- watch the lying piece of crap report --- and then deny your head off that this ISN'T bad science and propaganda.. I never said there was a "projection".. That's YOUR projection.. You are excusing the inexcusable at this point. YOU are the marginalized compromised dupe now...

Oyster is a canary in a coal mine as oceans warm - CBS News

 

[PMZ]

Full tilt denial and religious apocalyptic pronouncements --- like that CBS report.. That's whats left for the true believers...

NOTHING in that CBS report was real or correct.. Not the oysters, not the 212 degree GRAPHIC THAT THEY DISPLAYED...

And THAT is what public perception is supposed to be based on.. We're not stupid -- Even the stupid are not that stupid..
Guess that leaves you and the other holy rollers..

We are stupid when it comes to climate science and many other deep specialties.

Especially those like you who carefully avoid learning as it's inconvenient to your politics.

You were going to supply us some science that proves that what Hansen said is categorically impossible under the circumstances that he clearly stated. As everyone expected, you don't have a clue. That makes you the hysterical one.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Full tilt denial and religious apocalyptic pronouncements --- like that CBS report.. That's whats left for the true believers...

NOTHING in that CBS report was real or correct.. Not the oysters, not the 212 degree GRAPHIC THAT THEY DISPLAYED...

And THAT is what public perception is supposed to be based on.. We're not stupid -- Even the stupid are not that stupid..
Guess that leaves you and the other holy rollers..

We are stupid when it comes to climate science and many other deep specialties.

Especially those like you who carefully avoid learning as its inconvenient to your politics.

You were going to supply us some science that proves that what Hansen said is categorically impossible under the circumstances that he clearly stated. As everyone expected, you don't have a clue. That makes you the hysterical one.

What were CO2 levels the last time the oceans boiled?

 

[PMZ]

Full tilt denial and religious apocalyptic pronouncements --- like that CBS report.. That's whats left for the true believers...

NOTHING in that CBS report was real or correct.. Not the oysters, not the 212 degree GRAPHIC THAT THEY DISPLAYED...

And THAT is what public perception is supposed to be based on.. We're not stupid -- Even the stupid are not that stupid..
Guess that leaves you and the other holy rollers..

We are stupid when it comes to climate science and many other deep specialties.

Especially those like you who carefully avoid learning as its inconvenient to your politics.

You were going to supply us some science that proves that what Hansen said is categorically impossible under the circumstances that he clearly stated. As everyone expected, you don't have a clue. That makes you the hysterical one.

What were CO2 levels the last time the oceans boiled?

When is the last time that there were 7B humans on the planet dumping megatons of GHGs into the atmosphere?